Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

168Re: [extremeperl] Book: Higher Order Perl

Expand Messages
  • Adam Turoff
    Mar 29 2:41 PM
    • 0 Attachment
      On Tue, 29 Mar 2005 15:11:02 -0700, Rob Nagler <nagler@...> wrote:
      > David Wheeler writes:
      > > It seems to me that if you know nothing about logic programming, then
      > > you can't really think that way in Perl.
      > http://www.perlmonks.org/?node=424075

      How does that disprove David's point?

      Ovid is doing a Prolog implementation in Perl. If you don't know
      anything about logic programming, a Prolog implementation in Perl
      won't help you very much.

      > It seems to me that you are saying: You have to learn German to
      > understand psychology well. Jung and Freud were German, but the world
      > of psychology has grown, and now, I would argue, it is more important
      > to know English (another evolutionary language :-) than German to
      > understand psychology.

      False analogy. Jung and Freud wrote in German. If you want to understand
      Jung and Freud, read Jung and Freud. In translation. If you want to
      the nuance of meaning that Jung, Freud, or Goete used, learn German.

      A valid analogy would be: both English and Latin have a subjunctive mood;
      the subjunctive isn't used widely in English, so if you want to understand
      the subjunctive, learn Latin. (Note that this has nothing to do with
      studying Roman history or reading Ovid[1]).

      Basically, you are saying you are happy dealing with functional
      programming in translation. That's fine. Knock yourself out. But that
      doesn't address the fact that functional programming in Perl loses
      something in translation. It may be subtle, or it may be significant, but
      *something* is lost.

      -- Adam

      [1] The dead Roman, not the Perl hacker. ;-)
    • Show all 58 messages in this topic